Article

Notes on the Seniority Smokescreen

in

Via School Finance 101:

Seniority, in the modern reformy lexicon, is among the dirtiest words. Senior teachers are not only ineffective and greedy and never put interests of the children over their own, but they are in fact downright evil, a persistent drain on state and local economies and a threat to our national security! By contrast, “effectiveness” is good and since seniority and effectiveness are presumed entirely unassociated, the simple solution is to replace any reference to seniority in current education policies with measures of “effectiveness.”

If only it was so simple. This modern reformy mantra grossly misinterprets the relationship between seniority and effectiveness, presumes currently available measures of effectiveness to be more useful than they really are at sorting “good” from “bad” teachers, ignores that the proposed solutions have in many cases been found NOT to solve the supposed problem, and is oblivious to the broader literature on teacher labor markets, compensation and the quality of the teaching workforce.

Seniority and Effectiveness

Numerous studies over time have shown that as teachers reach somewhere around their 5th year, student achievement gains under those teachers begin to grow more slowly and to an extent level off.[1] These findings, to the extent we believe that these metrics of test score gain adequately represent teaching effectiveness, do not by any stretch of the imagination mean that more experienced teachers are less effective. Rather, their effectiveness increases from year to year level off. If they have indeed reached their optimal performance then it makes sense to continue to compensate senior teachers in order to retain them. A constant cycle of replacement costs money and costs in terms of lost effectiveness during the start-up years.

Continue reading...

I'm Your Puppet

in

A gues post by a reader under the pseudonym of Think.

Oil billionaires Charles and David Koch use their massive wealth to fund many right-wing organizations, including the Tea Party, but the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) gives them the best return on their investment. The Koch brothers bankroll ALEC task forces as they create “model bills” and hand them to conservative legislators who are also members of ALEC. Those lawmakers sponsor the model bills in their respective state legislatures, including Ohio, and get them passed into laws, making the Koch brothers’ extreme fundamentalism legally binding.

Ohioans can thank the Koch brothers and ALEC's Ohio legislators for the extreme education laws that have been passed in recent years. One piece of ALEC educational legislation is HB 555, “The Ohio School Report Card Bill,” which houses the infamous "Third Grade Guarantee." ALEC also orchestrated several new changes that were passed in Ohio's 2013 biennial budget, including a new school funding plan and the expansion of the school voucher program. To see what other educational policies the Koch brothers and ALEC have waiting in the wings, check this out.

According to Bill Phillis of the Ohio Education and Adequacy Coalition: "ALEC is a champion of charter schools and voucher legislation and thus is geared toward starving the public common school. K-12 Inc., the nation’s largest provider of online charter schools, paid its CEO Ron Packard $5 million in total compensation in 2011. Additionally, Packard owns millions of dollars in company shares, not a bad compensation package for a school superintendent. He is on the ALEC Education Task Force. The Ohio Virtual Academy charter school is operated by K-12, Inc. Ohioans should recognize that tax dollars (deducted from school districts) are being used to support a superintendent’s salary of $5 million plus millions in company shares, while many school districts are cutting essential programs and services due to lack of funds. Ohio taxpayers are subsidizing outrageous salaries and benefits of for-profit charter operators, and slick, expensive marketing. On average, charter schools spend twice as much per pupil on administration as traditional school districts."

ALEC pulls the strings of Republican governors around the country, many of whom are ALEC alumni, and Charles and David Koch are the hands-on puppet-masters who help ALEC control the legislative process in those states. Every time another ALEC "school reform" law is passed and signed, this loud melodic pledge, sung to the tune written by Spooner Oldham and Dan Penn, can be heard coming from an executive office at the Ohio Statehouse:

Pull the string and I'll work for you, I'm your puppet,
I'll say funny things if you want me to, I'm your puppet,
I'll be yours to have and to hold,
Brothers, you've got total control of your puppet.
Pull another string and I'll sign your bills, I'm your puppet,
Snap your fingers and I'll give you thrills, I'm your puppet,
Your every wish is my command,
All you gotta do is wiggle your hands,
I'm your puppet, I'm your puppet.
Pull them little strings and I'll sing you this song, I'm your puppet,
Make me do right or make me do wrong, I'm your puppet,
Treat me good and I'll do anything,
I'm just a puppet and you hold my string, I'm your puppet,
Yeah, I'm your puppet.

Think.

The Builder

in

Rachel Nelli, a gifted teacher in Hilliard City Schools, kindly gave us permission to publish this. Her writings can be found at "Something Creative I Haven't Thought Of Yet"

Lately I've seen a lot of my colleagues looking downcast, and more demoralized than ever. I am, too. It's been hard to articulate why, though, without people's eyes glazing over. It just doesn't connect to something they really know.

So, if you're a teacher, and you'd like to explain it a little better, share this.

And if you're not a teacher, but you'd like to understand a little better--whether you love the teacher or have a gripe with her, or both, read this:

The Builder

Once upon a time there was a builder. He built houses, and he was good at it. He could look at plans and know, from experience, which plans would work well, which needed tweaking, and which ones should be sent back for revisions. He knew his materials. He understood wood and cement, nails and steel. Knew how to check for flaws, how to shape and refine the materials he used to make them exactly fit what he needed for each home. He loved his work, loved his team, loved seeing his fine homes, standing tall and beautiful, and knowing he’d done something of worth.

Then one day, the elected head of the local building council appeared, and handed him a set of plans. They were rather different than other plans, but workable. They called for things to be done in a different order than the builder thought was wise, but the client was insistent that these were the finest and best plans, designed from new understandings of the principles of building.

“Very well,” said the builder. “I will study these, and work with them. When should I expect my supplies to arrive?”

“Supplies?” asked the surprised councilman, “Why, you have all the supplies you need! They are everywhere!”

Raising an eyebrow, the builder looked about at the empty landscape and asked again, “Where? What would you like me to use? These plans call for all new kinds of materials, and I do have lots of bit and pieces in my truck, but the house they would build certainly wouldn’t match these plans.”

Exasperated, the official gestured widely to the environs. “Why, there are supplies everywhere! There’s a forest right there! It has all the wood you could need! There is clay beneath our feet that can make fine bricks! There is a river of water just over that rise with a slate bed! Good grief, man, you have all you could ask for! All you have to do is look.”

The builder raised his other eyebrow and replied, “Well, I suppose I could use them, but who is to ensure the quality -- I know nothing of the kind of wood or shale or clay that is out there. And creating these materials will take a great deal of time. I am very good at evaluating and using materials provided, but creating them whole is another matter entirely. What extra staff and budget is there for this, for it will far exceed the costs of just building, which is the job for which I originally bid.”

Now infuriated, the councilman exploded, “What are you, lazy? You tell me you’re an expert builder, yet you can’t make your own materials? Who would be better qualified? What, you want someone else to make things for you? Time? Why should I give you extra time? You have plenty of time since you only 'work' 7 hours out of the day, and often spend weeks off at a time between jobs.

Staff? We hired YOU, the ‘expert’, to build this home, and now you’re saying you want extra help to do what anyone could do easily in a mere moment? I suppose you could use volunteers, but you’ll have to find them on your own time. I can’t even understand why you didn’t come prepared with all your materials in the first place. Isn’t that what we pay you for? To be prepared?”

The official stomped away, muttering “Skilled builder. HA. Lazy complainer is what he is.” Then he turned and yelled, “If you DON’T do the job, NOW, to MY SPECIFICATIONS, I’ll let everyone know what a terrible job you do, how you are incompetent at even the most basic levels and you will never work in this field again! Send me updates twice a day on your progress, with exact data and examples to show what you’ve done.”

“But….” began the builder, but the client was gone. Shoulders drooping and head bent, the builder picked up his wheelbarrow and tools and trudged toward the rise, to begin work. It would be a very, very long day.

Children for sale to charters

in

An article appeared in the Cleveland Plain Dealer titled "Charter school recruiting "gimmicks" draw fire from church leaders who declare, Our children are not for sale." The article draws attention to a Cleveland communities ire at marketing tricks employed by a for-profit charter school

A new charter school that parked an ice cream truck behind a Cleveland school district school this summer to attract students has angered neighborhood parents and a regional coalition of churches.

Officials of the Greater Cleveland Congregations and parents of students at Case Elementary School on the near East Side gathered Monday to call that recruiting effort unacceptable and to seek assurances from the new East Preparatory Academy charter school that it aims to provide quality education and not just make profits off students.

Community members attempted to hand the principal a letter, which she promptly refused to accept.

Jawanza Colvin, pastor of Olivet Institutional Baptist Church, said the group does not want charter schools – schools that are publicly-funded but privately-run – to be able to attract students with gimmicks like ice cream or electronic giveaways without providing a quality education.

"The message that we're sending to all the poor-performing charter schools in the city of Cleveland is that our kids are not for sale," Colvin said, before leading the crowd in chants of "Our children are not for sale."

Kids in Ohio are for sale to charter schools. These kinds of marketing tactics are mild compared to some efforts, such as those we detailed a few weeks ago employed by K12 Inc, an Ohio charter eschool

Former sales employees at K12's call centers described high pressure to make huge enrollment quotas in order to get a commission. Sales employees were provided with a "script" of what to say to prospective students and parents, including purported "statistics" showing that K12 students were years more advanced than brick-and-mortar school students. Sample quotes:

1. CW2 described a toxic work environment where sales staff were pressured to meet unrealistic quotas, frequently being forced to make as many as 200 outgoing calls daily to keep up. CW2 confirmed that sales staff were never given any actual data of student performance, but were instead fed statistics from K12's website, and were told to tell parents that students who did the K12 program for 1-2 years performed better than their peers at brick and mortar schools.

2. CW4 stated that there was constant pressure to generate sales, describing the Company's sales philosophy as "enroll, enroll, enroll." CW4 stated that enrollment consultants were instructed to refer to the performance of K12 students as "comparable [to] or even better" than the performance of students at traditional schools, and to state that students at K12 schools were "on a better tier" than those at traditional schools.

Sale, or enrollment, are critical to the for-profit efforts of charter schools. Once a student is on their rolls they get paid by the state. If that student subsequently leaves, that money does not transfer back to the district, but stays with the charter school. It's a nice gravy train. Would you be surprised to learn that the East Preparatory Academy mentioned in the Plain Dealer article has deep ties to David Brennan and White Hat Management?

RttT Has Failed To Deliver

in

As ODE prepares to dig through hundreds of Straight A Fund applications, Race-to-the-Top, it's big brother in the dog-eat-dog world of funding schools through competitive grant making is looking like a big flop according to a new report published by the Economic Policy Institute. The report finds

States made unrealistic and impossible promises
  • With one exception, every grantee state promised to raise student achievement and close achievement gaps to degrees that would be virtually or literally impossible even with much longer timelines and larger funding boosts.
  • Virtually every state has had to delay implementation of its teacher evaluation systems, due to insufficient time to develop rubrics, pilot new systems, and/or train evaluators and others.


RTTT policies fall short on teacher improvement and fail to address core drivers of opportunity gaps

  • States have focused heavily on developing teacher evaluation systems based on student test scores, but not nearly as much on using the evaluations to improve instruction, as intended.
  • Because state assessments tend to test students’ math and reading skills, attention has been focused mostly on those subjects, potentially to the detriment of others. States have also struggled to determine how to evaluate teachers of untested subjects and teachers of younger students, a critical issue, given that they constitute the majority of all teachers.
  • While some states have developed smart strategies to recruit talented professionals to teach subjects and/or teach in schools that are underserved, the vast majority of alternative certification money and effort has gone to bringing young, largely uncredentialed novices to teach in disadvantaged schools.
  • Districts heavily serving low-income and minority students, especially large urban districts, face some of the most severe challenges. Tight timelines and lack of resources compound RTTT’s failure to address poverty- related impediments to learning. Heightened pressure on districts to produce impossible gains from an overly narrow policy agenda has made implementation difficult and often counterproductive.


RTTT shortcomings have spurred state–district and union–management conflicts that hinder progress

  • The tight budgets that led many states to apply for RTTT funding have proven problematic as state education budgets, and staff, are reduced just as more resources and experts are needed.
  • While states have worked hard to reach out to local education agencies (LEAs) to secure their participation—a main requirement for RTTT funding—districts increasingly protest state micromanagement, limited resources, and poor communications.
  • The heavy focus on evaluation and punishment over improvement has made teachers, principals, and superintendents suspicious and has reduced support for RTTT.
  • States and districts that laid strong foundations for change, including making teachers real partners, and making union–management collaboration fundamental to the success of reform, have seen the most progress, have encountered the fewest bumps, and seem more likely to sustain gains. District and school culture, which varies tremendously within and across states, also plays a role in determining whether implementation efforts are succeeding or struggling.
  • While educators see great potential in the Common Core State Standards, the limited funding and lack of professional development linked to student data from RTTT raises concerns that the even more intense demands of the Common Core will exacerbate achievement gaps rather than produce benefits.

The report also notes that long-term data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) suggest that the standards-and-accountability era has not boosted achievement any more than achievement grew in the decades that preceded it. The push to do too much too quickly with too few resources has led teachers, principals, and superintendents to express frustration and stress. Most critical, many of the major problems limiting student and school success remain unaddressed.

With the money now expended, RttT initiatives are even less likely to have a lasting impact.

MISMATCHES IN RACE TO THE TOP LIMIT EDUCATIONAL IMPROVEMENT